JUDGMENT - N.P. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.:----Rev. Father Denis s/o. Chittarajan Kamath, who was working as a Secretary of Saint Franics De-Sales Education Society, Aurangabad was removed from his post by Bishop who alleges to be the President of the Society and this removal was challenged by him in Regular Civil Suit No 814 of 1990 filed in the Court of Civil Judge. Junior Division at Aurangabad. Defendants namely; the alleged President and the person who is appointed in place of the plaintiff, contested the suit and also raised plea that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to hear this suit because of a bar created by section 80 of the Bombay Pubic Trusts Act, I960. Plaintiff had submitted an application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 praying that the defendants be restrained from obstructing him from working as a Secretary of the said Trust. Despite raising an objection in the written statement, a separate application was also moved by the defendants on 9 7-1990 that the point for the jurisdiction be decided though the prayer did not say so elaborately but the intention of the defendant in filing this application appear to be that this issue be tried as preliminary issue. This is clear by the fact that in the title of this application, there is a mention that this application, is under section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. It appears that the learned trial Judge did not pass any order separately on this application and did not frame any preliminary issue. In fact, no issues have been framed in this suit at all. But he proceeded to dispose of both the applications namely: application for temporary injunction at Exhibit 5 and application for deciding issue of jurisdiction namely; Exhibit 14 together by an elaborate judgment The learned Judge framing points at issue held that Civil Court had the jurisdiction to entertain and try the instant suit and also consider the question of grant of interim relief and reject the application by his order dated 23-7-1990.

2. Aggrieved by this order passed by the 4th Civil Judge, Junior Division, Aurangabad in Regular Civil Sent No. 814 of 1990, plaintiff preferred Misc. Civil Appeal bearing No. 163 of 1990 objecting to the refusal of the temporary injunction In this appeal, an application for the interim relief was moved by the plaintiff appellant and the learned Additional District Judge, Aurangabad was pleased to grant an injunction as prayed by the plaintiff restraining defendants from obstructing plaintiffs function as Secretary of the said Trust. Society by Order dated 29-8-1990 but the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 163 of 1990 is still pending on the file of the District Court, Aurangabad.

3. The main contention raised by Shri S. C. Bora, learned Counsel for the appellant, before me is that not only the trial Court has acted with material irregularity in deciding the question of the interim relief before framing an issue regarding the jurisdiction and deciding it as a preliminary issue required by mandate of section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but has also acted without jurisdiction. Shri Bora submits that whenever an objection to the jurisdiction of the Court is raised, the Court has no jurisdiction to pass any order of interim relief unless it decides the question of jurisdiction first and finds that it has jurisdiction and only an exception carved out from this is that during the pendency of the question of jurisdiction and when the decision of the said question is in process, ad interim relief can be granted by the Court. Shri Bora submits, that in the instant case, the relief considered and refused is not ad interim relief but it is temporary having finality only subject to appeal, till disposal of the suit. Shri Bora further submits that since the matter was disposed of in the trial Court, right to appeal arose in plaintiff and he could obtain interim relief in the appeal. Therefore, even interim relief granted in appeal would be without jurisdict

Click Here to Read the rest of this document